Members TampaYankee Posted March 3, 2011 Members Posted March 3, 2011 Regulators Reject Proposal That Would Bring Fox-Style News to Canada Robert F. Kennedy Jr..President, Waterkeeper Alliance; Professor, Pace University Posted: February 28, 2011 09:54 PM As America's middle class battles for its survival on the Wisconsin barricades -- against various Koch Oil surrogates and the corporate toadies at Fox News -- fans of enlightenment, democracy and justice can take comfort from a significant victory north of Wisconsin border. Fox News will not be moving into Canada after all! The reason: Canada regulators announced last week they would reject efforts by Canada's right wing Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, to repeal a law that forbids lying on broadcast news. Canada's Radio Act requires that "a licenser may not broadcast....any false or misleading news." The provision has kept Fox News and right wing talk radio out of Canada and helped make Canada a model for liberal democracy and freedom. As a result of that law, Canadians enjoy high quality news coverage including the kind of foreign affairs and investigative journalism that flourished in this country before Ronald Reagan abolished the "Fairness Doctrine" in 1987. Political dialogue in Canada is marked by civility, modesty, honesty, collegiality, and idealism that have pretty much disappeared on the U.S. airwaves. When Stephen Harper moved to abolish anti-lying provision of the Radio Act, Canadians rose up to oppose him fearing that their tradition of honest non partisan news would be replaced by the toxic, overtly partisan, biased and dishonest news coverage familiar to American citizens who listen to Fox News and talk radio. Harper's proposal was timed to facilitate the launch of a new right wing network, "Sun TV News" which Canadians call "Fox News North." Harper, often referred to as "George W. Bush's Mini Me," is known for having mounted a Bush like war on government scientists, data collectors, transparency, and enlightenment in general. He is a wizard of all the familiar tools of demagoguery; false patriotism, bigotry, fear, selfishness and belligerent religiosity. Harper's attempts to make lying legal on Canadian television is a stark admission that right wing political ideology can only dominate national debate through dishonest propaganda. Since corporate profit-taking is not an attractive vessel for populism, a political party or broadcast network that makes itself the tool of corporate and financial elites must lie to make its agenda popular with the public. In the Unites States, Fox News and talk radio, the sock puppets of billionaires and corporate robber barons have become the masters of propaganda and distortion on the public airwaves. Fox News's notoriously biased and dishonest coverage of the Wisconsin's protests is a prime example of the brand of news coverage Canada has smartly avoided. See original article for links to Canadian sources at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-f-kennedy-jr/fox-news-will-not-be-moving-into-canada-after-all_b_829473.html Quote
Members TampaYankee Posted March 3, 2011 Author Members Posted March 3, 2011 This would be hilarious if it were not so horrific how the Fox 'News' Channel has to horrendously distorted and corrupted the American political scene and process. I shake my head at how us Americans are real idiots about some things. This is one piece of news you will never see on Fox 'News'. Unfortunately, I doubt you will see it on any other major news outlets either with the possible exception of MSNBC. Our news outlets have a shortage of journalistic integrity when it comes to holding Fox News accountable for their lies and deceit. They are scared to confront lies and deceit from a powerful entity -- nothing new -- but the likes of Edward R Murrow with a platform from which to speak is MIA today. That incluces all of the major anchors and even former anchors like Brokaw who have little to lose by speaking truth to and about power. Quote
Guest zipperzone Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 It sure doesn't say much for our PM Harper. He is an obnoxious pig. I think I would actually trust Geo W. before I would trust him - and that says a lot Quote
Guest JamesWilson Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 It sure doesn't say much for our PM Harper. He is an obnoxious pig. I think I would actually trust Geo W. before I would trust him - and that says a lot I agree, zipperzone, that Shrub would be preferable to HRH Stephen the First. But only because George Jr. wasn't really into the business of running the US (into the ground)... he was just a good-ole-boy set up as a puppet leader so the real nasties could do the dirty work behind the scenes. Harper is actually one of the nasties, and he is very much visible in pushing the neo-con agenda in Canada. Thankfully, without the same level of success as has been achieved south of the borders. Quote
Members TampaYankee Posted March 4, 2011 Author Members Posted March 4, 2011 I agree, zipperzone, that Shrub would be preferable to HRH Stephen the First. But only because George Jr. wasn't really into the business of running the US (into the ground)... he was just a good-ole-boy set up as a puppet leader so the real nasties could do the dirty work behind the scenes. Harper is actually one of the nasties, and he is very much visible in pushing the neo-con agenda in Canada. Thankfully, without the same level of success as has been achieved south of the borders. How is Harper generally viewed in the country? The East? The West? The Heartland? When is the next national election? What is the general view of his reelection or is he term limited? If so then how do the Conservatives look to repeat a win? Quote
Guest JamesWilson Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 How is Harper generally viewed in the country? The East? The West? The Heartland? When is the next national election? What is the general view of his reelection or is he term limited? If so then how do the Conservatives look to repeat a win? Harper is the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, which has its roots in Alberta. So he is pretty popular out west, as well as in the more rural parts of the country. The big cities outside of Quebec still are heavily Liberal and NDP (centre-left and left-wing parties), and Quebec is still dominated by the separatist Bloc Quebecois. We don't have fixed elections in Canada, so when the next one will be is anyone's guess. We have a minority government right now (the ruling Conservatives have less members of parliament than the combined opposition parties), so if they lose a confidence vote in parliament then there is automatically an election. There is a budget vote coming up later in March (a confidence vote) that many people think will purposefully include items that will not be acceptable to the opposition parties, so if that happens, and the opposition parties screw up their courage and vote against the budget, we would have an election (approximately 6 weeks later). Current projections, should an election be held, are that not much would change - the Conservatives would still form a minority government. Of course, lots can happen during an election campaign... even the short 6-week ones we have up here! ;-) Quote
Members TampaYankee Posted March 4, 2011 Author Members Posted March 4, 2011 Harper is the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, which has its roots in Alberta. So he is pretty popular out west, as well as in the more rural parts of the country. The big cities outside of Quebec still are heavily Liberal and NDP (centre-left and left-wing parties), and Quebec is still dominated by the separatist Bloc Quebecois. We don't have fixed elections in Canada, so when the next one will be is anyone's guess. We have a minority government right now (the ruling Conservatives have less members of parliament than the combined opposition parties), so if they lose a confidence vote in parliament then there is automatically an election. There is a budget vote coming up later in March (a confidence vote) that many people think will purposefully include items that will not be acceptable to the opposition parties, so if that happens, and the opposition parties screw up their courage and vote against the budget, we would have an election (approximately 6 weeks later). Current projections, should an election be held, are that not much would change - the Conservatives would still form a minority government. Of course, lots can happen during an election campaign... even the short 6-week ones we have up here! ;-) I should have recalled Canada's parlimentary form of gov't when I put the question. Nevertheless, good information for me, thanks. You guys have such a refreshingly simple process with minimal opportunity for corruption. I wish we could shorten our process and as a consequence get a lot of the money and special interest influence out of it. Such a rational process is not for us. We don't even have a law which makes it illegal for news outlets to 'knowingly' lie. Sadly that would be umamerican. What does that say about us? Quote
Guest zipperzone Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 I should have recalled Canada's parlimentary form of gov't when I put the question. Nevertheless, good information for me, thanks. You guys have such a refreshingly simple process with minimal opportunity for corruption. I wish we could shorten our process and as a consequence get a lot of the money and special interest influence out of it. Such a rational process is not for us. We don't even have a law which makes it illegal for news outlets to 'knowingly' lie. Sadly that would be umamerican. What does that say about us? I too wish you could/would shorten the process. It seems that the week BO took office the 24hr news channels were already blabbing about his chances in 2012 and it has never really stopped. Now we're in for the next 2 years of electioneering and as much as I like looking at Anderson Cooper - it does get tiresome. Quote
